U.S. Supreme Court of Colorado: Trump is not eligible for the state's 2024 presidential primary

The U.S. Supreme Court of Colorado ruled on Tuesday (19th) local time that former President Trump will be disqualified from participating in the state's 2024 presidential primary.

The lawsuit was filed by Colorado voters, with assistance from the political organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

The Colorado Supreme Court passed the ruling 4-3 that day, with three judges voting against it.

"We conclude that Trump is disqualified from the presidency under Article 14 (of the 3rd Amendment to the US Constitution). Therefore, it would be a mistake for the Secretary of State to list Trump as a candidate in the presidential primary under the Election Act. "Therefore, the Secretary of State may not include Trump's name on the ballot for the 2024 presidential primary, nor count any ballot papers cast for Trump," the four judges who voted in favor of Trump said in their ruling opinion that day. ”

Three opponents also cited reasons why they disagreed with the exclusion of Trump from the primary list. One said the case would be dismissed because Trump was not charged with insurrection, another said the case would be dismissed because Trump was not convicted, and a third said the court had no authority to decide the issue under the state's election law.

This is the first time in U.S. history that a presidential candidate has been disqualified under Article 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, and the first and only U.S. state to disqualify Trump from the primary in the state. The Colorado Supreme Court said it was delaying its ruling until Jan. 4, 2024, "pending review by the U.S. Supreme Court."

In accordance with Colorado law, votes for ineligible candidates will not be allowed to be counted.

Whether the U.S. Supreme Court will accept it

Former President Donald Trump was disqualified from the presidency under the alleged insurgency clause of the U.S. Constitution, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.

The Trump campaign called the decision "completely flawed" and said it would appeal the ruling "expeditiously."

"We have every confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will soon rule in our favor. Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, said in a statement.

David Becker, a CBS election law commentator, said it was not mandatory for the Supreme Court to take the case, but that "they would almost 100 percent likely take the case."

Michael Gerhardt, a distinguished professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law and a scholar of U.S. constitutional law, also said that the U.S. Supreme Court is "likely" that the case will be accepted.

"It's a big deal and it has real consequences. "The consequences are different from those of Trump being allowed to run in the primaries." In cases where you can't even vote in the primary, the consequences are brought to the attention and action of the Supreme Court. ”

"I think one of the key questions for the Supreme Court to determine is whether the court itself should be the body that decides the matter, or maybe Congress should decide, or we leave it to the states. "The court will not be willing to take responsibility for the final judgment, because it will be slammed no matter what." ”

Will other states in the United States follow suit

Trump lost Colorado by 13 percentage points in 2020 and is considered "not needed to win next year's presidential election." But the underlying dilemma Trump faces is that courts in more than a dozen U.S. states, in addition to Colorado, have filed the insurrection clause argument to prevent Trump's name from voting in the primary. If more courts and election officials follow Colorado's example, Trump will be excluded from those states that are sure to win.

"I think that now that the 'bandage' has been removed, other state courts may have had more courage to take similar action. Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, said, "This would pose a significant threat to Trump's candidacy." ”

The Colorado ruling is in stark contrast to the previous Minnesota Supreme Court. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled last month that the state could nominate anyone in the primary. It rejected the plaintiffs' previous argument that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment had blocked Trump from the state's primaries, but also said the plaintiffs could try again during the U.S. election.

In another 14th Amendment Section 3 case, a Michigan judge ruled that it was up to Congress, not the judiciary, to decide whether Trump could stay on the ballot. The plaintiffs in the case are appealing the decision.

The team that filed the lawsuit is a liberal group called FreeSpeechForPeople, which has filed a separate lawsuit in Oregon demanding that Trump "not appear in the primary list."

The ruling was challenged by Trump contenders

After the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling was announced, Trump's Republican opponents said the ruling was seriously flawed.

Trump's harsh critic and former New Jersey Gov. ChrisChristie, answering questions at Bedford City Hall in New Hampshire, said the ruling was "probably premature" because Trump had not yet been tried for sedition.

"I don't think any court should prevent Donald Trump from being president of the United States. I think it is up to the voters to stop him from becoming president of the United States. Christie said.

Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, echoed Christie's remarks. "We don't need judges to make these decisions, we need voters to make these decisions. Haley said.

Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, who has always supported Mr. Trump, promised that he would remove his name from the Colorado primary and encouraged other Republican candidates to do the same.

"The framers of the 14th Amendment will be shocked to see this provision politically weaponized to prevent the former president from seeking re-election. Ramaswamy said on social media X.

Another of Mr. Trump's main rivals, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, criticized the verdict as ultra vires of justice. "The Left invokes 'democracy' to justify its use of power, even if it means abusing judicial power to remove candidates from the ballot on false legal grounds. The Supreme Court should dismiss it. DeSantis said in a statement on X.